And it was, at least in the beginning, self destructive. The original version engaged a breaking mechanism that basically destroyed itself. So a false positive

And it was, at least in the beginning, self destructive. The original version engaged a breaking mechanism that basically destroyed itself. So a false positive caused by the wood being a little green/damp would cost $300 to get the saw back up and running. I think the new version rapidly drops the blade below the table surface instead of destroying itself. Still, it fits sixtofour's #1 and #2, they invented a tech, tried to get it mandatory by law, so they could charge large license fees. Edit: Besides, what IS licensing a patent if not leveraging a monopoly.